W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: ISSUE-433: Can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq

From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:35:05 +0100
Message-ID: <4FE8D989.7030909@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: Provenance Working Group <public-prov-wg@w3.org>, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
OK, I think we can point out that other approaches are possible.  I suppose I 
took that as read.  Odd that SOAP is the protocol raised because that *is* 
fundamentally HTTP-based.

#g

On 25/06/2012 12:17, Paul Groth wrote:
> Hi Graham,
>
> We had some requests from implementers to see if there was a way to
> allow for something like SOAP or other protocol to be used with the
> service description other than http. Note, I don't think we have to
> define it just say something about how this could be done. Yes, the
> focus is clearly http but the idea would be to leave the door open to
> such other protocols.
>
> Paul
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Graham Klyne<GK@ninebynine.org>  wrote:
>> Yes, if non-HTTP URIs are used.  But the focus of this document was, from the
>> outset, intended to focus on using HTTP.
>>
>> To say more, I'd need to understand exactly what is being requested here.
>>
>> #g
>> --
>>
>> On 23/06/2012 20:04, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>> ISSUE-433: Can the protocol be decoupled from the service definition in prov-aq
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/433
>>>
>>> Raised by:
>>> On product:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 25 June 2012 21:47:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:16 UTC